M 323 - Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

Standard Specification for
Superpave Volumetric Mix Design
AASHTO Designation: M 323-221

Technically Revised: 2022
Technical Subcommittee: 2d, Proportioning

of Asphalt–Aggregate Mixtures
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

555 12th Street NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20004
© 2022 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.
Standard Specification for
Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

AASHTO Designation: M 323-22 1
Technically Revised: 2022
Technical Subcommittee: 2d, Proportioning of Asphalt–Aggregate Mixtures
1. SCOPE
1.1. This specification for Superpave volumetric mix design uses aggregate and mixture properties to
produce job-mix formulas for asphalt mixtures. It includes the original Superpave design method
based on four percent air voids and the Superpave5 design method based on five percent air voids.
1.2. This standard specifies minimum quality requirements for binder, aggregate, and asphalt mixtures
for Superpave volumetric mix designs.
1.3. This standard may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment. This standard does
not purport to address all of the safety concerns associated with its use. It is the responsibility of
the user of this procedure to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the
applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
2. REFERENCED DOCUMENTS
2.1. AASHTO Standards:
< M 320, Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder
< M 332, Performance-Graded Asphalt Binder Using Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR)
Test
< R 28, Accelerated Aging of Asphalt Binder Using a Pressurized Aging Vessel (PAV)
< R 35, Superpave Volumetric Design for Asphalt Mixtures
< R 59, Recovery of Asphalt Binder from Solution by Abson Method
< T 11, Materials Finer Than 75-µm (No. 200) Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washing
< T 27, Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
< T 164, Quantitative Extraction of Asphalt Binder from Asphalt Mixtures
< T 176, Plastic Fines in Graded Aggregates and Soils by Use of the Sand Equivalent Test
< T 240, Effect of Heat and Air on a Moving Film of Asphalt Binder (Rolling Thin-Film Oven
Test)
< T 283, Resistance of Compacted Asphalt Mixtures to Moisture-Induced Damage
< T 304, Uncompacted Void Content of Fine Aggregate
< T 308, Determining the Asphalt Binder Content of Asphalt Mixtures by the Ignition Method
< T 312, Preparing and Determining the Density of Asphalt Mixture Specimens
by Means of the Superpave Gyratory Compactor
< T 313, Determining the Flexural Creep Stiffness of Asphalt Binder Using the Bending Beam
Rheometer (BBR)
TS-2d M 323-1 AASHTO

 T 315, Determining the Rheological Properties of Asphalt Binder Using a Dynamic Shear
Rheometer (DSR)
 T 319, Quantitative Extraction and Recovery of Asphalt Binder from Asphalt Mixtures
 T 335, Determining the Percentage of Fracture in Coarse Aggregate
2.2. ASTM Standard:

 D4791, Standard Test Method for Flat Particles, Elongated Particles, or Flat and Elongated
Particles in Coarse Aggregate
2.3. National Asphalt Pavement Association Publication:

 IS 128, HMA Pavement Mix Type Selection Guide
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/pavements/asphalt/HMA.pdf
2.4. Other References:

 LTPP Seasonal Asphalt Concrete Pavement Temperature Models. LTPPBind,
https://infopave.fhwa.dot.gov/Tools/LTPPBindOnline
Note 1—The different generations of the LTPPBind program use different algorithms and
weather databases for determining the PG high temperature for a location. The choice of which
LTPPBind version to use is up to the specifier.
 NCHRP Report 452: Recommended Use of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in the Superpave
Mix Design Method: Technician’s Manual. National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Project D9-12, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2001.
3. TERMINOLOGY
3.1. air voids (Va)—the total volume of the small pockets of air between the coated aggregate particles
throughout a compacted paving mixture, expressed as a percent of the bulk volume of the
compacted paving mixture.
3.2. binder content (Pb)—the percent by mass of binder in the total mixture, including binder and
aggregate.
3.3. binder content RAP (PbRAP)—the percent by mass of binder in the RAP based on total RAP,
including binder and aggregate.
3.4. asphalt mixtures—includes hot mix and warm mix asphalt.
3.5. design ESALs—design equivalent (80-kN) single-axle loads.
3.5.1. discussion—design ESALs are the anticipated project traffic level expected on the design lane
over a 20-yr period. For pavements designed for more or less than 20 yr, determine the design
ESALs for 20 yr when using this standard.
3.6. dust-to-binder ratio (P0.075/Pbe)—by mass, the ratio between the percent of aggregate passing the
75-µm (No. 200) sieve (P0.075) and the effective binder content (Pbe).
3.7. maximum aggregate size—one size larger than the nominal maximum aggregate size (Note 2).
Note 2—The definitions given in Sections 3.7 and 3.8 apply to Superpave mixtures only and
differ from the definitions published in other AASHTO standards.

3.8. nominal maximum aggregate size—one size larger than the first sieve that retains more than
10 percent aggregate (Note 2).
3.9. primary control sieve (PCS)—the sieve defining the break point between fine- and coarse-graded
mixtures for each nominal maximum aggregate size.
3.10. reagent-grade solvent—a solvent meeting the level of chemical purity as to conform to the
specifications for “reagent grade” as established by the Committee on Analytical Reagents of the
American Chemical Society and used to extract the asphalt binder from the mixture. When asphalt
binder is intended to be extracted and then tested for additional properties, a reagent-grade solvent
must be used. Non-reagent-grade solvents may contain epoxy resins that may affect the properties
of the recovered binder. In particular, certain acid-modified binders may be affected by non-
reagent grade solvents.
3.11. reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP)—removed and/or processed pavement materials containing
asphalt binder and aggregate.
3.12. reclaimed asphalt pavement binder ratio (RAPBR)—the ratio of the RAP binder in the mixture
divided by the mixture’s total binder content.
3.13. voids in the mineral aggregate (VMA)—the volume of the intergranular void space between the
aggregate particles of a compacted paving mixture that includes the air voids and the effective
binder content, expressed as a percentage of the total volume of the specimen.
3.14. voids filled with asphalt (VFA)—the percentage of the VMA filled with binder (the effective
binder volume divided by the VMA).
4. SIGNIFICANCE AND USE

4.1. This standard may be used to select and evaluate materials for Superpave volumetric mix designs.
At an agency’s discretion, this standard may be used to select and evaluate materials for
Superpave5 volumetric mix designs. Unless noted, all sections apply to Superpave and
Superpave5. Requirements specific to Superpave5 are contained in Annex A.
5. BINDER REQUIREMENTS
5.1. The binder shall be a performance-graded (PG) binder, meeting the requirements of M 320 or
M 332, which is appropriate for the climate and traffic-loading conditions at the site of the paving
project or as specified by the contract documents.
5.1.1. Determine the mean and the standard deviation of the yearly, 7-day-average, maximum pavement
temperature, measured 20 mm below the pavement surface, and the mean and the standard
deviation of the yearly, 1-day-minimum pavement temperature, measured at the pavement surface,
at the site of the paving project. These temperatures can be determined by use of the LTPPBind
software or can be supplied by the specifying agency. If the LTPPBind software is used, the
LTPP high- and low-temperature models should be selected in the software when determining the
binder grade. Often, actual site data are not available, and representative data from the nearest
appropriate weather stations will have to be used.
5.1.2. Select the design reliability for the high- and low-temperature performance desired. The design
reliability required is established by agency policy.
Note 3—The selection of design reliability may be influenced by the initial cost of the materials
and the subsequent maintenance costs.

5.1.3. Using the pavement temperature data determined, select the minimum required PG binder that
satisfies the required design reliability.
5.2. If the requirements of M 320 apply and the traffic speed or the design ESALs warrant, increase the
high-temperature grade by the number of grade equivalents indicated in Table 1 to account for the
anticipated traffic conditions at the project site. If the requirements of M 332 apply, follow those
requirements for the appropriate binder selection.
Table 1—Binder Selection on the Basis of Traffic Speed and Traffic Level for Binder Meeting M 320
Adjustment to the High-Temperature Grade of the Binder a
Traffic Load Rate
Design ESALs b (Million) Standard c Slow d Standing e
<0.3 — — —f
0.3 to <3 — 1 2
3 to <10 — 1 2
10 to <30 —f 1 2
≥30 1 1 2
a
Increase the high-temperature grade by the number of grade equivalents indicated (one grade is equivalent to 6˚C). Use the low-temperature grade as determined
in Section 5.
b
The anticipated project traffic level expected on the design lane over a 20-yr period. Regardless of the actual design life of the roadway, determine the design
ESALs for 20 yr.
c
Standard traffic—where the average traffic speed is greater than 70 km/h.
d
Slow traffic—where the average traffic speed ranges from 20 to 70 km/h.
e
Standing traffic—where the average traffic speed is less than 20 km/h.
f
Consideration should be given to increasing the high-temperature grade by one grade equivalent.
Note 4—Practically, PG binders stiffer than PG 82-xx should be avoided. In cases where the
required adjustment to the high-temperature binder grade would result in a grade higher than a
PG 82, consideration should be given to specifying a PG 82-xx and increasing the design ESALs
by one level (e.g., 10 to <30 million increased to ≥30 million).
5.3. If RAP is to be used in the mixture, it may be specified according to percent dry weight (mass) of
the mixture or by reclaimed asphalt pavement binder ratio.
5.3.1. Percent dry weight (mass) of mixture—If the agency elects to use RAP adjustments by percent dry
weight (mass) of the mixture, the binder grade selected in Sections 5.1.3 and 5.2 needs to be
adjusted according to Table 2 to account for the amount and stiffness of the RAP binder.
Procedures for developing a blending chart are included in Appendix X1.
Table 2—Binder Selection Guidelines for Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) Mixtures
Recommended Virgin Asphalt Binder Grade RAP Percentage
No change in binder selection <15
Select virgin binder one grade softer than normal (e.g., select a 15 to 25
PG 58-28 if a PG 64-22 would normally be used)
Follow recommendations from Appendix X1 >25
Note 5—An Agency may alter the virgin binder selection criteria from Table 2 based on the
research procedures provided in Appendix X2 and field experiences.
5.3.2. Reclaimed asphalt pavement binder ratio—If the agency elects to use the RAPBR method, the
binder grade selected in Sections 5.1.3 and 5.2 must be adjusted according to Table 3 to account
for the amount of stiffness of the RAP binder. Procedures for developing a blending chart are
included in Appendix X2.

Table 3—Binder Selection Guidelines for Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP)
Mixtures
Recommended Virgin Asphalt Binder Grade RAPBR
No change in binder selection <0.25
Follow recommendations from Appendix X2 >0.25
( PbRAP × PRAP )
RAPBR = (1)
100 × PbTotal
where:
RAPBR = Reclaimed asphalt pavement binder ratio to nearest 0.01;
PbRAP = Binder content of the RAP to nearest 0.1%;
PRAP = RAP percentage by weight of mixture to nearest 0.1%; and
PbTotal = Total binder content in the mixture to nearest 0.1%.
Note 6—A mixture performance test for cracking implemented by an agency is acceptable in lieu
of the RAPBR binder selection criteria in Section 5.3.2.
6. COMBINED AGGREGATE REQUIREMENTS

6.1. Size Requirements:
6.1.1. Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size—The combined aggregate shall have a nominal maximum
aggregate size of 4.75 to 19.0 mm for asphalt pavement surface courses and no larger than 37.5
mm for asphalt pavement subsurface courses.
Note 7—Additional guidance on selection of the appropriate nominal maximum aggregate size
mixture can be found in the National Asphalt Pavement Association’s IS 128.
6.1.2. Gradation Control Points—The combined aggregate shall conform to the gradation requirements
specified in Table 4 when tested according to T 11 and T 27.
Table 4—Aggregate Gradation Control Points

Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size—Control Points (% Passing)
Sieve Size, 37.5 mm 25.0 mm 19.0 mm 12.5 mm 9.5 mm 4.75 mm
mm Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
50.0 100 — — — — — — — — — — —
37.5 90 100 100 — — — — — — — — —
25.0 — 90 90 100 100 — — — — — — —
19.0 — — — 90 90 100 100 — — — — —
12.5 — — — — — 90 90 100 100 — 100 —
9.5 — — — — — — — 90 90 100 95 100
4.75 — — — — — — — — — 90 90 100
2.36 15 41 19 45 23 49 28 58 32 67 — —
1.18 — — — — — — — — — — 30 55
0.075 0 6 1 7 2 8 2 10 2 10 6 13
6.1.3. Gradation Classification—The combined aggregate gradation shall be classified as coarse-graded

when it passes below the Primary Control Sieve (PCS) control point as defined in Table 5 (also
see Figure 1). All other gradations shall be classified as fine-graded.

Table 5—Gradation Classification
PCS Control Point for Mixture Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size
(% Passing)
Nominal maximum aggregate size 37.5 mm 25.0 mm 19.0 mm 12.5 mm 9.5 mm 4.75 mm
Primary control sieve 9.5 mm 4.75 mm 4.75 mm 2.36 mm 2.36 mm 1.18 mm
PCS control point, % passing 47 40 47 39 47 40
Figure 1—Gradation Control Points for a 12.5-mm Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size Gradation
6.2. Coarse Aggregate Angularity Requirements—The aggregate shall meet the percentage of fractured
faces requirements, specified in Table 6, measured according to T 335.
6.3. Fine Aggregate Angularity Requirements—The aggregate shall meet the uncompacted void
content of fine aggregate requirements, specified in Table 6, measured according to T 304,
Method A.
6.4. Sand Equivalent Requirements—The aggregate shall meet the sand equivalent (clay content)
requirements, specified in Table 6, measured according to T 176.
6.5. Flat-and-Elongated Requirements—The aggregate shall meet the flat-and-elongated requirements,

specified in Table 6, measured according to ASTM D4791, with the exception that the material
passing the 9.5-mm sieve and retained on the 4.75-mm sieve shall be included. The aggregate shall
be measured using the ratio of 5:1, comparing the length (longest dimension) to the thickness
(smallest dimension) of the aggregate particles.
When RAP is used in the mixture, the RAP aggregate shall be extracted from the RAP using a
solvent extraction (T 164) or ignition oven (T 308) as specified by the agency. The RAP aggregate
shall be included in determinations of gradation, coarse aggregate angularity, fine aggregate

angularity, and flat-and-elongated requirements. The sand equivalent requirements shall be waived
for the RAP aggregate but shall apply to the remainder of the aggregate blend.
Table 6—Aggregate Consensus Property Requirements
Fractured Faces, Uncompacted Void Content

Coarse Aggregate, b of Fine Aggregate,
% Minimum % Minimum
Sand Flat and
Design ESALs a Depth from Surface Depth from Surface Equivalent, Elongated, b
(Million) ≤100 mm >100 mm ≤100 mm >100 mm % Minimum % Maximum
<0.3 55/— —/— —d — 40 —
0.3 to <3 75/— 50/— 40 e 40 40 10
3 to <10 85/80c 60/— 45 40 45 10
10 to <30 95/90 80/75 45 40 45 10
≥30 100/100 100/100 45 45 50 10
a
The anticipated project traffic level expected on the design lane over a 20-yr period. Regardless of the actual design life of the roadway, determine the design
ESALs for 20 yr.
b
This criterion does not apply to 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures.
c
85/80 denotes that 85 percent of the coarse aggregate has one fractured face and 80 percent has two or more fractured faces.
d
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures designed for traffic levels below 0.3 million ESALs, the minimum Uncompacted Void Content is 40.
e
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures designed for traffic levels equal to or above 0.3 million ESALs, the minimum Uncompacted Void Content is 45.
Note 8—If less than 25 percent of a construction lift is within 100 mm of the surface, the lift may
be considered to be below 100 mm for mixture design purposes.
7. ASPHALT MIXTURE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

7.1. The binder and aggregate in the asphalt mixture shall conform to the requirements of Sections 5
and 6.
7.2. The Superpave asphalt mixture design, when compacted in accordance with T 312, shall meet the
relative density, VMA, and dust-to-binder ratio requirements specified in Table 7 and the VFA
requirements in Table 8. The initial, design, and maximum number of gyrations are specified in
R 35. See Annex A for Superpave5 asphalt mixture design requirements.
Table 7—Asphalt Mixture Design Requirements

Required Relative Density,
Percent of Theoretical Voids in the Mineral Aggregate (VMA),
Maximum Specific Gravity % Minimum Dust-to-
Design Binder
ESALs, a Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size, mm Ratio
million N initial N design b N max 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.5 4.75 Range c
<0.3 ≤91.5 96.0 ≤98.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 0.6–1.2
0.3 to <3 ≤90.5 96.0 ≤98.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 0.6–1.2
3 to <10 ≤89.0 96.0 ≤98.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 0.6–1.2
10 to <30 ≤89.0 96.0 ≤98.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 0.6–1.2
≥30 ≤89.0 96.0 ≤98.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 0.6–1.2
a
Design ESALs are the anticipated project traffic level expected on the design lane over a 20-yr period. Regardless of the actual design life of the roadway,
determine the design ESALs for 20 yr.
b
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures, the relative density (as a percent of the theoretical maximum specific gravity) shall be within the range of 94.0 to
96.0 percent.
c
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures, the dust-to-binder ratio shall be 1.0 to 2.0, for design traffic levels <3 million ESALs, and 1.5 to 2.0 for design
traffic levels ≥3 million ESALs.

Note 9—If the aggregate gradation passes beneath the PCS Control Point specified in Table 5, the
dust-to-binder ratio range may be increased from 0.6–1.2 to 0.8–1.6 at the agency’s discretion.
Table 8—Voids Filled with Asphalt

Mixture VFA (%)
NMAS (mm) Minimum Maximum
37.5 64 69
25.0 67 71
19.0 69 73
12.5 71 75
9.5 73 76
4.75 63 78
Note 10—Mixtures with VMA exceeding the minimum value by more than 2 percent may be
prone to flushing and rutting. Unless satisfactory experience with high VMA mixtures is available,
mixtures with VMA greater than 2 percent above the minimum should be avoided.
7.3. The asphalt mixture design, when compacted according to T 312 at 7.0 ± 0.5 percent air voids and
tested in accordance with T 283, shall have a minimum tensile strength ratio of 0.80.
8. KEYWORDS
8.1. Aggregate and mixture properties; job mix formulas; Superpave; volumetric mix design.
9. REFERENCE
9.1. NCHRP. NCHRP Report 752: Improved Mix Design, Evaluation, and Materials Management
Practices for Hot Mix Asphalt with High Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement Content. National
Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 9-46, TRB, National Research Council,
Washington, DC, 2013.
ANNEX A
(Mandatory Information)
A1. SUPERPAVE5 ASPHALT MIXTURE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

A1.1. The asphalt mixture design, when compacted in accordance with T 312, shall meet the relative
density, VMA, and dust-to-binder ratio requirements specified in Table A1 and the VFA
requirements specified in Table A2. The initial, design, and maximum number of gyrations are
specified in R 35.

Table A1—Asphalt Mixture Design Requirements
Required Relative Density,
Percent of Theoretical Voids in the Mineral Aggregate (VMA),
Maximum Specific Gravity % Minimum
Design Dust-to-Binder
ESALs, a Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size, mm Ratio
b
million N initial N design N max 37.5 25.0 19.0 12.5 9.5 4.75 Range c
<0.3 ≤91.5 95.0 ≤97.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 0.6–1.2
0.3 to <3 ≤90.5 95.0 ≤97.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 0.6–1.2
3 to <10 ≤89.0 95.0 ≤97.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 0.6–1.2
10 to <30 ≤89.0 95.0 ≤97.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 0.6–1.2
≥30 ≤89.0 95.0 ≤97.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 0.6–1.2
a
Design ESALs are the anticipated project traffic level expected on the design lane over a 20-yr period. Regardless of the actual design life of the roadway,
determine the design ESALs for 20 yr.
b
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures, the relative density (as a percent of the theoretical maximum specific gravity) shall be within the range of 94.0
to 96.0 percent.
c
For 4.75-mm nominal maximum size mixtures, the dust-to-binder ratio shall be 1.0 to 2.0, for design traffic levels <3 million ESALs, and 1.5 to 2.0 for design
traffic levels ≥3 million ESALs.
Table A2—Voids Filled with Asphalt for Superpave5

Mixture Superpave5
NMAS % Minimum % Maximum
37.5 58 64
25.0 62 67
19.0 64 69
12.5 67 71
9.5 69 72
4.75 65 79
Note A1—If the aggregate gradation passes beneath the PCS Control Point specified in Table 5,
the dust-to-binder ratio range may be increased from 0.6–1.2 to 0.8–1.6 at the agency’s discretion.
Note A2—Mixtures with VMA exceeding the minimum value by more than 2 percent may be
prone to flushing and rutting. Unless satisfactory experience with high VMA mixtures is available,
mixtures with VMA greater than 2 percent above the minimum should be avoided.
A1.2. The asphalt mixture design, when compacted according to T 312 at 5.0 ± 0.5 percent air voids and
tested in accordance with T 283, shall have a minimum tensile strength ratio of 0.80.
APPENDIXES
(Nonmandatory Information)
X1. PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A BLENDING CHART

X1.1. Blending of RAP binders can be accomplished by knowing the desired final grade (critical
temperature) of the blended binder, the physical properties (and critical temperatures) of the
recovered RAP binder, and either the physical properties (and critical temperatures) of the virgin
asphalt binder or the desired percentage of RAP in the mixture.
X1.2. Determine the physical properties and critical temperatures of the RAP binder:
X1.2.1. Recover the RAP binder using T 319 (Note X1) with an appropriate solvent. At least 50 g of
recovered RAP binder are needed for testing. Perform binder classification testing using the tests
in M 320 or M 332. Rotational viscosity, flash point, and mass loss tests are not required.

Note X1—While T 319 is the preferred method, at the discretion of the agency, R 59 may be
used. Research conducted under NCHRP Report 452 indicated that R 59 might affect recovered
binder properties.
X1.2.2. Perform original dynamic shear rheometer (DSR) testing on the recovered RAP binder
to determine the critical high temperature, Tc (High), based on original DSR values where
G*/sin δ = 1.00 kPa. Calculate the critical high temperature as follows:
X1.2.2.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:
a = Δlog(G*/sin δ)/ΔT (X1.1)
X1.2.2.2. Determine Tc (High) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log(1.00) − log(G1 ) 
Tc (High) =   + T1 (X1.2)
 a 
where:
G1 = the G*/sin δ value at a specific temperature T1; and
a = the slope as described in Equation X1.1.
Note X2—Although any temperature (T1) and the corresponding stiffness (G1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the G*/sin δ value closest to the criterion (1.00 kPa) to
minimize extrapolation errors.
X1.2.3. Perform rolling thin-film oven (RTFO) aging on the remaining binder.
X1.2.4. Perform RTFO DSR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged binder to determine the critical
high temperature (based on RTFO DSR). Calculate the critical high temperature (RTFO DSR).
X1.2.4.2. Determine Tc (High) based on RTFO DSR, to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log(2.20) − log(G1 ) 
Tc (High) =   + T1 (X1.4)
 a 
where:
X1.2.5. Determine the critical high temperature of the recovered RAP binder as the lowest of the original
DSR and RTFO DSR critical temperatures. Determine the high-temperature performance grade
(PG) of the recovered RAP binder based on this single critical high temperature.
X1.2.6. Perform intermediate temperature DSR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged RAP binder to
determine the critical intermediate temperature Tc (Int), as if the RAP binder were pressure-aging-
vessel (PAV) aged.

X1.2.6.2. Determine Tc (Int) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log(5000) − log(G1 ) 
Tc ( Int ) =   + T1 (X1.6)
 a 
where:
selected, it is advisable to use the G*/sin δ value closest to the criterion (5000 kPa) to
X1.2.7. Perform BBR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged RAP binder to determine the critical low
temperature, Tc (S) or Tc (m), based on bending beam rheometer (BBR) stiffness or m-value.
a = Δlog(S)/ΔT (X1.7)
X1.2.7.2. Determine Tc (S) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log(300) − log( S1 ) 
Tc ( S ) =   + T1 (X1.8)
 a 
where:
S1 = the S-value at a specific temperature T1; and
Note X5—Although any temperature (T1) and the corresponding stiffness (S1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the S-value closest to the criterion (300 MPa) to
X1.2.7.3. Determine the slope of the m-value–temperature curve as follows:
a = Δm-value/ΔT (X1.9)
X1.2.7.4. Determine Tc (m) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 0.300 − m1 
Tc (m) =   + T1 (X1.10)
 a 
where:
m1 = the m-value at a specific temperature T1; and
Note X6—Although any temperature (T1) and the corresponding m-value (m1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the m-value closest to the criterion (0.300) to minimize
extrapolation errors.
X1.2.7.5. Select the higher of the two low critical temperatures, Tc (S) or Tc (m), to represent the low critical
temperature for the recovered asphalt binder, Tc (Low). Determine the low-temperature PG of the
recovered RAP binder based on this single critical low temperature.
X1.2.8. Once the physical properties and critical temperatures of the recovered RAP binder are known,
proceed with blending at a known RAP percentage or with a known virgin binder grade.

X1.3. Blending at a Known RAP Percentage:
X1.3.1. If the desired final blended binder grade, the desired percentage of RAP, and the recovered RAP
binder properties are known, then the required properties of an appropriate virgin binder grade can
be determined.
X1.3.1.1. Determine the critical temperatures of the virgin asphalt binder at high, intermediate, and low
properties using the following equation:
Tblend − (RAP × TRAP )

Tvirgin = (X1.11)
(1 − RAP)
where:
Tvirgin = critical temperature of virgin asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low);

Tblend = critical temperature of blended asphalt binder (final desired) (high,
intermediate, or low);
RAP = percentage of RAP, by weight, expressed as a decimal to the nearest 0.001; and
TRAP = critical temperature of recovered RAP binder (high, intermediate, or low).
X1.3.1.2. Using Equation X1.11 for the high, intermediate, and low critical temperatures, respectively, the
properties of the virgin asphalt binder needed can be determined.
X1.4. Blending with a Known Virgin Binder:
X1.4.1. If the final blended binder grade, virgin asphalt binder grade, and recovered RAP properties are
known, then the allowable RAP percentage can be determined.
X1.4.1.1. Determine the allowable RAP percentage using the following equation:
Tblend − Tvirgin
RAP = (X1.12)
TRAP − Tvirgin
where:
RAP = percentage of RAP, by weight, expressed as a decimal to the nearest 0.001;
Tvirgin = critical temperature of virgin asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low);
Tblend = critical temperature of blended asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low); and
TRAP = critical temperature of recovered RAP binder (high, intermediate, or low).
allowable RAP percentage that will satisfy all temperatures can be determined.
X2. PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE PROPERTIES OF BLENDED

RAP AND VIRGIN BINDERS
X2.1. Selection of the appropriate grade of virgin binder for mixtures with RAP binder ratios ≥0.25 can
be based on knowledge of the true grade of the RAP binder, the high and low critical temperatures
for the project location and pavement layer, and either the approximate RAP binder ratio or the
high and low critical temperatures for the available virgin binder(s).

Note X7—The high and low critical temperatures for a project location and pavement layer can
be determined using the latest version of LTPPBind.
Note X8—Agencies may elect to establish typical RAP binder properties for specific geographic
areas based on testing and analysis of RAP binders from numerous stockpiles within each area.
Detailed procedures on the geographic RAP evaluation are contained in Appendix X3.
X2.2. Determine the physical properties and critical temperatures of the RAP binder:
X2.2.1. Recover the RAP binder using T 319 (Note X3) with a reagent-grade solvent. At least 50 g of
recovered RAP binder are needed for testing. Perform binder classification testing using the tests
in M 320 or M 332. Rotational viscosity, flash point, and mass loss tests are not required.
Note X9—While T 319 is the preferred method, at the discretion of the agency, R 59 may be
used. Research conducted under NCHRP Report 452 indicated that R 59 might affect recovered
binder properties.
X2.2.2. Perform original dynamic shear rheometer (DSR) testing on the recovered RAP binder
to determine the critical high temperature, Tc (High), based on original DSR values where
G*/sin δ = 1.00 kPa. Calculate the critical high temperature as follows:

 G∗ 
∆ log  
a=  sin δ  (X2.1)
∆T
X2.2.2.2. Determine Tc (High) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log (1.00 ) − log ( G1 ) 
Tc ( High ) =   + T1 (X2.2)
 a 
where:
G1 = the G*/sin δ value at a specific temperature;
a = the slope as described in Equation X2.1; and
T1 = specific temperature.
X2.2.3. Perform rolling thin-film oven (RTFO) aging on the remaining binder.
X2.2.4. Perform RTFO DSR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged binder to determine the critical
high temperature (based on RTFO DSR). Calculate the critical high temperature (RTFO DSR).

 G∗ 
∆ log   (X2.3)
a=  sin δ 
∆T
Determine Tc (High) based on RTFO DSR, to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log ( 2.20 ) − log ( G1 ) 
Tc ( High ) =   + T1 (X2.4)
 a 
where:

X2.2.5. Determine the critical high temperature of the recovered RAP binder as the lowest of the original
DSR and RTFO DSR critical temperatures. Determine the high-temperature performance grade
(PG) of the recovered RAP binder based on this single critical high temperature.
X2.2.6. Perform intermediate temperature DSR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged RAP binder to
determine the critical intermediate temperature Tc (Int), as if the RAP binder were pressure aging
vessel (PAV) aged.

 G* 
∆ log  
a=  sin δ  (X2.5)
∆T
X2.2.6.2. Determine Tc (Int) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log ( 5000 ) − log ( G1 ) 
Tc ( Int ) =   + T1 (X2.6)
 a 
where:
Tc (Int) = critical intermediate temperature with PAV aged RAP binder;
Note X12—Although any specific temperature (T1) and the corresponding stiffness (G1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the G*/sin δ value closest to the criterion (5000 kPa) to
X2.2.7. Perform BBR testing on the recovered RTFO-aged RAP binder to determine the critical low
temperature, Tc (S) or Tc (m), based on bending beam rheometer (BBR) stiffness or m-value.

( ∆ log S )
a=
∆T (X2.7)
X2.2.7.2. Determine Tc (S) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 log ( 300 ) − log ( S1 ) 
Tc ( S ) =   + T1 (X2.8)
 a 
where:
S1 = the S-value at a specific temperature T1;
Note X13—Although any specific temperature (T1) and the corresponding stiffness (S1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the S-value closest to the criterion (300 MPa) to
X2.2.7.3. Determine the slope of the m-value–temperature curve as follows:

( ∆m-value )
a=
∆T (X2.9)
X2.2.7.4. Determine Tc (m) to the nearest 0.1°C using the following equation:
 0.300 − m1 
Tc ( m ) =   + T1 (X2.10)
 a 
where:
Tc (m) = critical temperature for the m-value;
m1 = the m-value at a specific temperature;
Note X14—Although any specific temperature (T1) and the corresponding m-value (m1) can be
selected, it is advisable to use the m-value closest to the criterion (0.300) to minimize
extrapolation errors.
X2.2.7.5. Select the higher of the two low critical temperatures, Tc (S) or Tc (m), to represent the low critical
temperature for the recovered asphalt binder, Tc (Low). Determine the low-temperature PG of the
recovered RAP binder based on this single critical low temperature.
X2.2.8. Once the physical properties and critical temperatures of the recovered RAP binder are known,
proceed with blending at a known RAP percentage or with a known virgin binder grade.
X2.3. Determination of the appropriate virgin binder grade using an approximate RAPBR:
X2.3.1. If the desired composite binder grade, the desired percentage of RAP, and the recovered RAP
binder properties are known, then the required properties of an appropriate virgin binder grade can
be determined.
X2.3.1.1. Determine the critical temperatures of the virgin asphalt binder at high, intermediate, and low
properties using the following equation:
Tc ( need ) −  RAPBR × Tc ( RAP Binder ) 
Tc ( virgin ) = (X2.11)
(1 − RAPBR )
where:
Tc (virgin) = critical temperature of virgin asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low);
Tc (need) = critical temperature needed for the climate and pavement layer (high,
RAPBR = RAP binder ratio—the mixture’s total binder content is an unknown prior to
mix design but can be estimated based on historical data for the aggregate type
and NMAS; and
Tc (RAP Binder) = critical temperature of recovered RAP binder (high, intermediate, or low).
properties of the virgin asphalt binder needed can be determined.
X2.4. Blending with a Known Virgin Binder:
X2.4.1. If the final blended binder grade, virgin asphalt binder grade, and recovered RAP properties are
known, then the maximum RAP binder ratio can be determined.
X2.4.1.1. Determine the maximum RAP binder ratio using the following equation:

Tc ( need ) − Tc ( virgin )
RAPBRmax = (X2.12)
Tc ( RAP Binder ) − Tc ( virgin )
where:
RAPBRmax = maximum RAP binder ratio;
Tc (need) = critical temperature needed for the climate and pavement layer (high,
Tc (virgin) = critical temperature of virgin asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low); and
Tc (RAP Binder) = critical temperature of recovered RAP binder (high, intermediate, or low).
X2.4.1.2. Use Equation X1.12 for the high, intermediate, and low critical temperatures, respectively, using
the critical temperature to determine the maximum RAP binder ratio to satisfy all temperatures
requirements.
X3. PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING RAP STOCKPILES

X3.1. The purpose of this appendix is to characterize properties of RAP asphalt binder within a
geographical area to determine the appropriate percentages of RAP at which virgin asphalt binder
properties should be changed for that geographical area.
X3.2. RAP stockpile locations should be selected throughout the geographical area. Geographical areas
should be selected with consideration to climatic zones and material sources. The number of
stockpile locations may depend on the size of the geographical area, variability of climate, and
other factors within the area.
X3.3. Evaluation of the physical properties of the recovered RAP binder begins with the sampling and
testing of the stockpiles within the geographical area. Samples should be large enough to provide
enough extracted asphalt binder for PG grading and evaluation of the results.
X3.4. In locations where RAP containing different binders such as polymer-modified grades is
stockpiled separately, evaluation of the RAP asphalt binder should be performed separately from
other stockpiles.
X3.5. Solvent extractions shall be performed on the RAP samples in accordance with T 319 to acquire
recovered binder samples. A reagent-grade solvent is required when asphalt binder is extracted
and tested for additional properties.
X3.6. Determine the physical properties and critical failure temperatures of the RAP binders as outlined
in Appendix X1.
X3.7. In some cases, the high-temperature grade of the recovered binder may be higher than the
temperature range of the DSR equipment. For these cases, the binder should be tested at three
temperatures: –3, –9, and –15°C from the high temperature limit of the equipment. Plot the log of
the test temperature versus the log of the binder property to project the temperature at which the
binder will meet the grade requirements. All binder grading should be performed to provide the
actual continuous grades of the RAP binder.
X3.8. Determine the distribution of RAP binder grades from stockpiles within the geographical area of
study. From the distribution of temperature grades, calculate the average continuous high and low
temperature grades from the RAP stockpiles. The average low-temperature grade adjusted by two
standard deviations warmer will provide 98 percent reliability for the low-temperature grade of the
RAP binders in the geographical area of study.

X3.9. Collect multiple samples of asphalt binder for each grade supplied into the geographical area of
study. Determine the continuous high and low temperatures grade for each binder. The average
low-temperature grade adjusted by two standard deviations warmer will provide 98 percent
reliability for the warmest low-temperature grade of the virgin binders in the geographical area.
X3.10. Perform a blending analysis using Section X1.4 to determine the maximum allowable percent of
RAP binder to be added to a virgin asphalt binder to meet the low-temperature grade according to
the LTPPBind software.
Note X15—For example, PG xx-22 may be specified; however, a RAP blend that produces a PG
xx-16 may provide 98 percent reliability according to the LTPPBind software. In most cases,
reliabilities of less than 98 percent are acceptable and will result in only minor temperature
differences.
X3.11. Evaluation of asphalt binder recovered from RAP stockpiles in a typical geographical area may
provide the necessary information to establish the maximum RAP binder replacement for a given
virgin binder grade in the area. This information can be used to establish design criteria within a
specific geographical area. In areas where the recovered RAP binder properties vary significantly,
a general RAP percentage may not be appropriate. In these cases, the analysis should be
performed on a project-by-project basis. Reevaluation of the analysis of the maximum asphalt
binder replacement amounts should be completed periodically to address changes in the binders
for any given geographical area.
1
Formerly AASHTO Provisional Standard MP 2. First published as a full standard in 2004.


M 323 - Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

M 323 - Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

M 323 - Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Standard Specification for

Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

AASHTO Designation: M 323-221

Technical Subcommittee: 2d, Proportioning

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

© 2022 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

Superpave Volumetric Mix Design

Technical Subcommittee: 2d, Proportioning of Asphalt–Aggregate Mixtures

TS-2d M 323-1 AASHTO

2.2. ASTM Standard:

2.3. National Asphalt Pavement Association Publication:

2.4. Other References:

3.4. asphalt mixtures—includes hot mix and warm mix asphalt.

3.5. design ESALs—design equivalent (80-kN) single-axle loads.

TS-2d M 323-2 AASHTO

4. SIGNIFICANCE AND USE

TS-2d M 323-3 AASHTO

TS-2d M 323-4 AASHTO

6. COMBINED AGGREGATE REQUIREMENTS

Table 4—Aggregate Gradation Control Points

6.1.3. Gradation Classification—The combined aggregate gradation shall be classified as coarse-graded

TS-2d M 323-5 AASHTO

6.5. Flat-and-Elongated Requirements—The aggregate shall meet the flat-and-elongated requirements,

TS-2d M 323-6 AASHTO

Table 6—Aggregate Consensus Property Requirements

Fractured Faces, Uncompacted Void Content

7. ASPHALT MIXTURE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

Table 7—Asphalt Mixture Design Requirements

TS-2d M 323-7 AASHTO

Table 8—Voids Filled with Asphalt

A1. SUPERPAVE5 ASPHALT MIXTURE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

TS-2d M 323-8 AASHTO

Table A2—Voids Filled with Asphalt for Superpave5

X1. PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A BLENDING CHART

TS-2d M 323-9 AASHTO

X1.2.2.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

a = Δlog(G*/sin δ)/ΔT (X1.1)

X1.2.4.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

a = Δlog(G*/sin δ)/ΔT (X1.3)

X1.2.6.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

TS-2d M 323-10 AASHTO

X1.2.7.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

X1.2.7.3. Determine the slope of the m-value–temperature curve as follows:

TS-2d M 323-11 AASHTO

Tblend − (RAP × TRAP )

Tvirgin = critical temperature of virgin asphalt binder (high, intermediate, or low);

X1.4. Blending with a Known Virgin Binder:

X2. PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE PROPERTIES OF BLENDED

TS-2d M 323-12 AASHTO

X2.2.2.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

X2.2.4.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

TS-2d M 323-13 AASHTO

X2.2.6.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

X2.2.7.1. Determine the slope of the stiffness–temperature curve as follows:

X2.2.7.3. Determine the slope of the m-value–temperature curve as follows:

TS-2d M 323-14 AASHTO

X2.4. Blending with a Known Virgin Binder:

TS-2d M 323-15 AASHTO

X3. PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATING RAP STOCKPILES

TS-2d M 323-16 AASHTO